ZenaTech’s CEO Related Party, Epazz, Engages In R&D Funded By ZenaTech, And Then Sold the Tech To Zena For 19 Times Their Book Valuation, Grossly Enriching Epazz Insiders At The Expense of Zena Shareholders - ZenaTech (NASDAQ: $ZENA ) has advanced approximately C$28.2 million in cash to Epazz (OTC: EPAZ), controlled by ZenaTech CEO Shaun Passleym, for R&D. - ZENA then purchased these developed assets at an inflated price from EPAZ in ZENA stock. -EPAZ own filing states: unamortized carrying value of $2,356,495.77 immediately prior to transfer. Consideration received consisted solely of ZenaTech equity securities with an aggregate fair value of $46,498,653.23 - ZENA convertible preferred shares can convert to approximately 86 million additional common-equivalent shares, making ZENA substantially more diluted than ordinary market-data share counts suggest. See full report here: whitediamondresearch.com/res…

Officially, today $BZAI and $MBOT have gone lower than our price targets of 25c and $1, respectively. Hard work pays off, kids!

According to Oppenheimer analyst Suraj Kalia on $PLSE: "We recently accompanied PLSE management on a West Coast NDR. Competitor stumbles (Volt 2.0 events, concerns over JNJ's EP franchise) highlight PLSE's strategic value, as discussed during our meetings. As such, we are raising our price target on PLSE to $60 from $35. To be clear, much remains to be learned about the science of nsPFA. Hence, the pivotal trial readout (due CY27) will be crucial to complementing our understanding of this new PFA modality, the durability of outcomes, and nsPFA's role in the competitive matrix." Kalia has a decent rating on Tipranks. But he is almost doubling his PT on PLSE because of "competitor stumbles"? That doesn't sound too convincing to me. He even says: "To be clear, much remains to be learned about the science of nsPFA. Hence, the pivotal trial readout (due CY27) will be crucial to complementing our understanding of this new PFA modality, the durability of outcomes, and nsPFA's role in the competitive matrix." So if much still needs to be learned, why be so quick to raise the PT? Just because the stock is up here and he chooses a PT slightly above the share price? I wouldn't be surprised to see PLSE trade all the way back down to the mid-$20s. Since the big insiders stopped buying over $20 and its risen here to the $50s without the release of additional data.

$MBOT is flush with cash, way more than enough for their expansion for 2-3 years. They could do a share buyback.

$ZENA $UAVS $QUCY getting crushed. Shorting drone stocks, primarily non-military, has been a good strategy over the past 2 months.

From our $BZAI report: "Blaize Holdings (BZAI) is such a blantant fraud in our view, and we find it sad that uninformed retail investors are funding it. We urge the SEC to take a hard look at this company, which has a 9 figure market cap." Maybe the SEC took our advice? News today: Blaize disclosed last night that in July and August , the company and certain of its employees and members of the board received subpoenas and inquiries from the Department of Justice requesting information relating to the company's business and agreements with certain counterparties. Blaize has also received voluntary requests for information from the Securities and Exchange Commission for information substantially similar to that sought by the DOJ.

Thanks @BreakoutPoint . We've been doing well recently with our long term short positions like $MBOT and $BZAI - still short both of them. MBOT almost at our $1 PT, BZAI almost at our 25c PT. See our reports here: MBOT whitediamondresearch.com/res… BZAI whitediamondresearch.com/res…

When is $ZENA gonna report Q226 earnings results? Also, they are gonna have to do an offering soon. According to dilution tracker they only have about 2 weeks worth of cash left.

One head scratcher in our opinion is $PLSE, which we were clearly wrong about and would like to learn more about what has been driving the enormous rise in share price and market value. Gotta wonder who's buying at this price. The company is selling stock like crazy and just announced last night that they sold 1.38M shares over the past month at an average price of about $50. They replenished their ATM facility for up to another $85M worth of stock sales. One bull emailed us the reason he thinks for its huge move: "PLSE booked  and started all there targeted US trials in less than 1/2 the time they expected . Initial excitement was the success reported, From over 100 in EU. That within In 1 year 97% did not need another procedure ! The amount of time it takes to actually do the procedure is 5-7 seconds . No shit. The same surgeon / can more than double what they now due in a day which is about 3. and it’s minimally evasive .This is all on there last quarterly report. The. CTO  is same  that created the DaVinci Robotic tech with Bob. They expect FDA clearance for the clamp end this quarter . Then full clearance 2nd quarter 27. The important factor is the new CEO Bob hired about 2 years ago. He was a Snr Vp for Boston Sci / For Stategic acquisitions 15 years & in this sector 40." Our PHD medtech analyst said in response to the bull's email: "All BS. Enrollment speed is good, but nothing extraordinary, it is fast relative to their own expectations, which given their “stellar” clinical study history is likely conservative. Sr vp of BSX is a joke. He was in business development, which is a revolving door. Major issue with this BS, is that it does not address the $4B in market value, which is unheard of for a me-too technology of a company with 25 year's record of constant failure." We questioned the PHD if the 5-7 seconds time per procedure and 97% didn't need another procedure are significant. He responded: "No. These are the arguments for morons that do not understand how real clinical life works."

Let's look at this another way. We've done reports on over 50 different companies over the years. Out of those 50+, what do these 4 companies that sued us have in common?

The drone sector isn't doing too well right now. An extremely volatile sector. $ZENA and $QUCY down big after our reports. Especially ZENA, but we believe QUCY will go much lower once insiders start selling. We had bullish reports on $XTIA and $UMAC - UMAC is still higher than when we published but still far off highs. XTIA struggling, the CEO talked a big game but has recently resigned. UMAC CEO told me XTIA's business is doing fine.

Also, $QUCY stated in their latest 10-Q: "The Company issued 1,250,000 restricted shares to an advisor for services related to marketing services." Does anyone know when those shares will be unrestricted? That's a good chunk. Send a DM, we're still collecting info for our next report. sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/…

$QUCY down big so far today. They better start paying for more promotions!

So $QUCY hired an 80 year old guy to explain and sell what's supposed to be cutting-edge technology? Reminds us of "Know Labs" former ticker $KNW. They had a 76 year old Chief Medical Officer. See our report on our website here: Know Labs Is An Obvious Medical Device Scam, We’re Calling: “Theranos’ Retarded Cousin” - White Diamond Research Probably because you can pay old guys less since they are pretty much retired and aren't doing much. KNW's CEO resigned pretty quickly after we published the report. The company was a total failure, it later became a crypto treasury.

As many of you know, $QUCY has decided to file a lawsuit against us. We put the lawsuit in the Archives section of our website here: whitediamondresearch.com/arc… We offered to make peace with the company to avoid the lawsuit. We offered to never write about the company, or their CEO David Lazar, ever again. However, to our surprise they refused! And they also published a PR about our offer, which was meant to be private. So, we can make this a public affair then. We have no problem with that, it's a public company after all. We'll be tweeting our thoughts on interesting developments about the company/lawsuit. Looking through the lawsuit, there are some statements in there that deserve a second look. A few of them are below: It states: "Almost immediately after receiving QUCY's decision not to pursue fundraising, upon information and belief, Funder caused QUCY's stock price to sharply decline amid a Iarge short position premised upon Funder's access to non-public, material information about QUCY" Wow! So basically, QUCY went to this "Funder" to try and get him to invest in QUCY. However, after the Funder was able to access "non-public, material info" on QUCY during the negotiations, he decided to short it! I think both QUCY longs and shorts would like to know, what is this non-public, material info? When will it become public? The lawsuit also states: "Organic buying pressure propelled QUCY's stock price from $0.32 to $3.56 an increase of more than 768% in approximately one month." Wouldn't just saying "buying pressure" be enough? Why do go out of their way use the word "organic"? As opposed to "artificial" or "inorganic" buying pressure? We don't want to make any assumptions, we are in a lawsuit after all, but some interesting definitions come to mind: Protesting too much — the best fit when someone goes out of their way to insist on something, making you suspect the opposite is true. From the phrase, “The lady doth protest too much.” Overcompensation — they emphasize a claim to conceal or compensate for the opposite reality. Preemptive denial — they deny something before anyone has accused or questioned them. The lawsuit also states: "White Diamond positions itself as an independent news and research agency, advertising itself as "an Independent institutional-grade research focused on identifying asymmetric risks in small and micro-cap equities. White Diamond is anything but that. White Diamond is a market participant, who hides at the bottom of a tertiary webpage the following: "As of the publication date of our reports, White Diamond Research, along with its clients, affiliates, and related entities, may have a short position in the securities discussed..." We're "anything but that"? So we're not independent? Are we "dependent" then? Or are independent companies not allowed to short? What would be the proper way to call ourselves? We have the disclaimer that we short the companies we talk about. I guess QUCY doesn't think that's enough. The lawsuit states: "hatchet-job "research' is taken for legitimate market analysis." This is a strong opinion by the company. If they were to look at our history, we have about a 90% success rate. We list all of our past reports on our website in plain site, and show the price of the stock the day before we published, and the price of the stock now. Many of the stocks we published bearish reports on are down 95%+. And our bullish report stocks have done well too overall. We do deep due diligence on stocks, and report our diligence. Otherwise, we wouldn't have the long-term results that we have. The lawsuit states: "These statements were false, defamatory and designed for the sole malicious purpose of depressing QUCY's share price." However, the company doesn't explain why our statements are false. That's not enough in a court of law in the US. The accusing party needs to PROVE their accusations. More to come!